[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: The Scientific Process

On Thu, 20 Apr 1995, Ralph Chapman wrote:

>   I must again strongly disagree with Van Smith's recent statements.
> VS states that there is a point beyond which questioning theories becomes
> less rational and uses relativity, Maxwell's Equations and Evolution as
> examples and then states that the impact theory also fits this bill.
> Hardly - and remember I am a supporter of the impact theory at this time.
> First of all, scientists are constantly questioning those major processes
> all the time - that's how the theories get modified through time. The way

This reminds me of the debate about plate tectonics.  I think 
paleontologist, more than any other group of earth scientists, were 
unwilling to move to a mobile earth.  And just like the K-T event they 
had some of the best evidence for plate tectonics.

But Kuhn would predict that those closest to the change will be the most 
resistant.  Personally, I have never had a problem with an abrupt K-T 
event, but my perspective is from the Ordovician-Silurian.  And when 
someone suggests the late Ordovician extinction was abrupt I turn a bit 

Van Smith is on target.